L'Ecluse v. . Brokaw
144 N.E. 913, 238 N.Y. 611, 1924 N.Y. LEXIS 794
This text of 144 N.E. 913 (L'Ecluse v. . Brokaw) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Bluebook
L'Ecluse v. . Brokaw, 144 N.E. 913, 238 N.Y. 611, 1924 N.Y. LEXIS 794 (N.Y. 1924).
Opinion
Appeal dismissed, with costs, on ground that the Appellate Division having unanimously reinstated the verdict leave to appeal was necessary (Burns Mfg. Co. v. Clinchfield Products Corp., 231 N. Y. 561); no opinion.
Concur: His cock, Ch. J., Cardozo, Pound, McLaughlin, Crane, Andrews and Lehman, JJ.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Markiewicz v. Thompson
158 N.E. 314 (New York Court of Appeals, 1927)
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
144 N.E. 913, 238 N.Y. 611, 1924 N.Y. LEXIS 794, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lecluse-v-brokaw-ny-1924.